Wow! This is the best you can do? This PDF is some research paper on some noname Korean server does not say much and clear about the 5 &#147;criteria&#148; you claim to be important. Where does it say that the Subaru system can send 100% of the power to either axle? All it says that &#147;The output torque of the transmission is distributed 36% to front wheels and 64% to rear&#148;. And no mention what particular car it was installed on as part of this &#147;experiment&#148;. If Subaru&#146;s AWD system would be capable of 100% power transfer to either axle, this would be on Subaru&#146;s site and in every Subaru&#146;s car review and every publication.

&#147;36% to front wheels and 64% to rear&#147; - so what? The Outlander&#146;s 4WD Lock mode also distributes up to 60% of torque to the rear wheels. And you can get this information not from some weird PDF file, but from the official Outlander site. Outlander&#146;s 4WD Lock mode is a true full-time 4WD. Both 4WD Lock and 4WD Auto modes deliver constant torque to rear wheels and there is no the rear wheels disengagement at any speed.

The Outlander&#146;s AWD system is both reactive and proactive, as any good system should be. It proactively prevents wheel spin during start up and acceleration in slippery conditions. Even if the driver has not selected 4WD Auto or 4WD Lock modes on a 4WD Outlander model, front wheel spin can be controlled under a variety of conditions. The 4WD Auto (or I would call it 4WD Econo mode) provides better fuel economy while it allows to maintain intelligent torque to the rear axle.

Coupling torque is computed using a combination of feed-forward control, which operates in response to accelerator pedal action, and feedback control, which monitors the speed of the four wheels and computes any difference between front and rear wheel rotation speeds. The system interprets driving conditions and driver input and delivers the right amount of torque to the rear wheels.

The Outlander features standard Active Skid and Traction Control helps to prevent side slipping (spin and side drift) as a result of sudden steering wheel operation or on slippery roads. When it detects side-slipping or wheel spin, ASTC provides integrated control of brakes, engine torque (via the electronic throttle control), transmission and electronically controlled 4WD to improve vehicle stability.

The traction control portion of ASTC provides a "virtual" limited-slip differential effect by helping to prevent wheel spin during start up and acceleration in slippery conditions. An ASTC OFF switch allows the driver to disengage the system. Instances where that could be useful include driving the vehicle through deep snow, or out of a snowed-in parking space. In such situations, traction control could be a hindrance. The electronically controlled 4WD system does not rely on traction control to distribute power; power distribution is controlled through the electronically controlled viscous coupling, with ASTC influencing that as needed.

And unlike Subaru, the Outlnder is capable of the 100% power transfer to the front axle: just turn the knob at any speed :--)

PS Watch the 4 roller ramp test in the video to evaluate torque transfer. This is what I refered to earlier - the Passat they show has a Torsen and fails to climb the ramp, yet the Subaru succeeds. Note the wheels stop spinning completely.

I re-read that C/D comparo last night; I think the surprise star of the whole test was the Grand Vitara...scored pretty high in areas like Fun to Drive, offers low range and lock for high and low, and was midpack for mileage and acceleration...not bad at all. And it was only one point behind the Outtie for fourth.

Speaking of real-world owner ratings the results appear to be very consistent all across the three major consumer ratings sites. Hundreds of owners rated their cars. Sometimes you see some junkie rating there, but overall it&#146;s much more objective vs. some currupted magazine "comparo".

It might appear, that differences are small but they do reflect a trend well:

For the real people the Murano and the Outlander appear to be favorites in this group. both could use improvements, but overall they offer the best balance of styling, comfort, reliability, technology, value and driving fun.

Subarus, on my opinion are little behind in styling and technology, but they are very reliable cars and standard AWD is a great bonus, if fuel economy is not an issue.

The funny thing is, the Pilot's probably the biggest seller of that bunch, at least in the US. Go figure. I don't have any numbers, but I think it may even be possible that Pilot outsells Tribeca, Murano and Outlander combined.

You may be interested in truedelta.com, one fellow's indepedent effort to rate vehicle reliability/quality with no bias. I think he does a heck of a job. Take a look and enter your vehicle's info, if you wish... they're always looking to add more owners from smaller marketshare brands like Mitsubishi & Subaru, and the more real-world results there are, the more accurate the information.

I think Subaru does a good job limiting any reduction of fuel economy. Forester, for example, is already more fuel-efficient than nearly all similar AWD vehicles (the new RAV is the exception I can think of), and it's the oldest Subie in the stable. However, it has very minimal MPG loss compared to similar 2WD vehicles as well: PT Cruiser 19/26; HHR 23/30; 2WD CRV 23/30; new Scion Xb 22/28; Rondo 21/29; Forester 23/28. Forester's city MPG is tied for the best, and hwy MPG is only 2 MPG lower than the leaders. Among those competitors, Forester offers the most horsepower, the most torque, and full-time AWD - and the tradeoff vs. its most efficient competitors is only 2 MPG highway. I'd gladly give up 2MPG for more HP, torque & AWD.

Subaru's close to bringing to market direct injection gasoline engines, CVTs and the diesel. I think they are taking the right steps to increase their fuel economy even further. Plus, they're right with Mitsubishi, introducing a small electric vehicle for sale to the Japanese public in the next 2 years.

Plus, we all know owners don't take these compact SUVs off road, so their ratings do not reflect the abilities of the AWD system in that context.

From the Dakar/rally angle, though, it was a little disappointing to read about the off road results. Why didn't it perform better? My guess is it's because they used a Dodge Caliber platform to begin with.

The good thing about the Outlander, actually, is that by cutting costs with all the parts and platform sharing with Dodge and Hyundai, they were able to add a lot of content. The "corrupt" Car & Driver review reflects that with a good score for content.

Yes, it is funny, that the Pilot is the bigger seller of that bunch, so is the RAV4 which also has lower owner rating. Explanation is very simple to me: Honda and Toyota have much bigger marketing spending, plus they place more ads and car magazines and therefore they getting better ratings from these magazine's "experts", plus they have much bigger dealer presence. DOn't get me wrong, Toyota nad Honda make great cars, but not always the best.

Best product does not always have biggest market share (Microsoft/Apple, betamax/VHS, etc.)

Car magazines make living from car advertising. Don&#146;t they? Consumer Reports is the only magazine I know that at least claims that they are not paid by manufacturers. CR car reviews are not always on a high level, but they provide the best reliability info, since they collect it from real owners. All other magazines have the obvious conflict of interest: on one hand they have to be objective to cars they review, on the other hand they have to please donors who manufacture these cars, otherwise they not gonna get advertising dollars from a manufacturer - very tough position to be in. Car magazines are essentially additional marketing and sales tools for manufacturers and car &#147;experts&#148; are essentially salesmen. I am more interested in ratings by real-world owners. Real-world owners don't sell cars, instead they buy them paying hard earned dollars, so I have more trust to a 100 of real people who bought a car and drive it for a few months, rather then to one magazine &#147;expert&#148;/salesmen, who drives for 60 min. brand new car from dealership.

>> Edmunds users rates the Subaru Forester a 9.2, so in the compact SUV class it's a draw. An Outlander is smaller than the Pilot. MSN rates Forester 9.4, Yahoo 4.5, so basically no significant difference from the Outlander.

I did not want to bring another car to this thread, but yes, Outlander is a smaller car, and yes, Forester has great owner ratings, so to me it means it&#146;s a great vehicle, probably best in a class though it&#146;s not really a crossover &#150; it&#146;s a station wagon..

>> Plus, we all know owners don't take these compact SUVs off road, so their ratings do not reflect the abilities of the AWD system in that context.

Consumer ratings reflect overall owner satisfaction with a car, including mileage, styling, reliability, etc. Owners usually don&#146;t mention the AWD system, though I imagine if the vehicle would behave badly on slippery road, they would complain and it would affect the ratings.

>> From the Dakar/rally angle, though, it was a little disappointing to read about the off road results. Why didn't it perform better? My guess is it's because they used a Dodge Caliber platform to begin with.

Like I&#146;ve said, the comparo by magazine &#147;experts&#148; does not mean much to me: they push up whoever buys more ads. .

>> The good thing about the Outlander, actually, is that by cutting costs with all the parts and platform sharing with Dodge and Hyundai, they were able to add a lot of content. The "corrupt" Car & Driver review reflects that with a good score for content.

Mitsubishi might be also buying some ads, so the &#147;expert&#148; being in very difficult position have to play more sophisticated game, knowing that after all a consumer is looking at the bottom line: who lost in the comparo and who won. Details on who had &#147;good content&#148; matter less at the end.

>> The good thing about the Outlander, actually, is that by cutting costs with all the parts and platform sharing with Dodge and Hyundai, they were able to add a lot of content.

I am not sure what you mean here, since the Outlander is sharing its platform design with Lancer (so does the Caliber), but the Outlander sold in North America is build entirely in Japan. I believe it is build with all Japanese parts and labor, which is a main reason it has highest CR reliability and owner satisfaction ratings.

>>I think Subaru does a good job limiting any reduction of fuel economy.

Yes, but Subaru&#146;s relatively decent fuel economy is achieved at cost of using variable torque for the rear axle, adjusted for road condition. To stay competitive they pretty much follow what other manufacturers are doing..

>>Forester, for example, is already more fuel-efficient than nearly all similar AWD vehicles

2WD cars still have better mileage, so dual mode 2WD/4WD cars have advantage, since consumer has two choices.

All of my examples were 2WD vehicles competing w/AWD Forester. Only 2 of the 5 got better mileage... the Honda and the Chevy... and their advantage was 2MPG more on the highway (they had no advantage in the city) gained at least in part from their less powerful engines. Bump those engines up to match the Forester's and I wonder if their slight advantage would vanish altogether.PT Cruiser 19/26; HHR 23/30; 2WD CRV 23/30; new Scion Xb 22/28; Rondo 21/29; Forester 23/28I'm not saying there's no drivetrain loss with AWD, but just saying 2WD cars get better mileage is much too sweeping.

"Yes, but Subaru&#146;s relatively decent fuel economy is achieved at cost of using variable torque for the rear axle, adjusted for road condition."

I don't understand how that's a bad thing. Subarus allow torque to vary between front & rear axles, allowing the most torque to reach the wheels with the most traction in any given instant, whether the driver observes slippery conditions beforehand or not. Different Subaru models have different normal bias... some are FWD-biased for better economy and some are RWD-biased for more sporting driving experience.

>> I'm sure you will share your source and credible proof to back this claim?

Do you need a credible proof that car magazines get paid by car manufacturers? Hey, this is capitalism! Don&#146;t pretend to be so naive. Ads in magazines don&#146;t come for free, so the top comparo ratings and awards such as "car of the year". There is no such thing as free lunch.

>> Personal opinions do not count.

Then be consistent: you should not count personal opinions of magazine &#147;experts&#148;, nor your own personal opinions.

I'm gonna defend aviboy97 on this one...he works closely with many Mazdas and has insider access to information you and I simply don't have. He's more than qualified to share useful info with Edmunds members.

Hello everyone. I'm new to this forum but am about to purchase a 2008 Tribeca 5 Pas/Limited. Now I am really torn about getting the black exterior with beige interior or the diamond gray exterior with gray interior. I wanted black on black but obviously that's not possible. The beige interior is much nicer in person and I always wanted a black SUV. But people keep telling me to stay away from black cars cause they're so dam hard to keep clean. Has anyone that had a black car share some insight to this. Now the diamond gray color is also gorgeous on the outside. You guys let me know which one you like better. Thanks.

YLZ, welcome to the forum! Just an FYI, you've been cross-posting (posting the same message in multiple categories) which is generally frowned upon. Just find one category that's appropriate to your topic and stick with that one. That makes browsing quicker and easier for everyone (so we don't have to read your post several times :-) )

As for the color choice, darker exterior is always harder to keep clean, but does look cool. And although the beige interior is a really classy look, I opted for the grey cuz I thought it was sportier. (Also, my last two cars had beige and I was tired of it).

Hey...I am a Toyota fan, but I can tell you that the Black Avalon I had was sharp, but one of the reasons I traded was the color. Black is not only hard to keep looking great, but it also shows every little scratch and swirl mark. It also absorbs lots of heat if you have it out alot in the sun. Black is a sharp color if you want to go to an extreme work -out to keep it clean. Best of luck on your color!

To add to the comparisons, not much has been said here about the Highlander 08 In a recent snow Ice event, it did a beautiful job on the road. Highlander has one of the highest reviews posted, with excellent reviews about this great SUV.

Hey Lucky, What I meant was the Number of reviews by folks that own them...73 reviews currently with a 9.3 .I hope Edmunds will review the Highlander 08 soon! It is a great SUV. I had friends with me today for the first time, and they said it was one of the best they had been in...quiet, smooth. They were very surprised, and loved the looks.I drove a Tribeca, but found the Highlander to have more room inside, and I prefer the looks of the Highlander better. IMO the Toyotas have a better fit & finish that's why I have owned many!

Wow. The front end isn't bad, but the new Pilot is one plain basic looking CUV.

There I was looking at photos of the new Pilot, and next to it was an ad for the Enclave. The Enclave has more beauty and style in it's tail light trim than the Pilot has in the whole vehicle. But, design is subjective. For instance, I love the look of my '07 Tribeca, which was certainly panned by many.

just my $0.02.

The Buick Enclave is a remarkably beautiful vehicle. Never driven one, but they sure are puurty.

I agree with you on the looks of the Pilot. I love the looks of my Highlander 08 much better!While the Enclave is sharp looking, they are having problems. Check out their Forum section. There are some un-happy folks with it.